Roma Locuta Est – Causa Finita Est

An
accounting of what transpired between Pope St. Innocent I, Pope St. Zosimus,
St. Augustine, Pelagius and Celestius.

By Scott
Windsor

Roma Locuta Est, Causa Finita Est

First off, let me begin with the phrase, so often used by
Catholics, “roma locuta est, causa finita est,” translated:“Rome has spoken, the case is closed.”One of the first things a sharp Protestant
apologist may pick up on is St. Augustine didn’t use “those words.”That is how I began studying this topic, in
fact.I had “quoted” that phrase in
Latin, and a Protestant apologist challenged me, stating, “Augustine didn’t use
those words.”I thought this strange,
since I had heard and read that phrase many times before, so I started looking
into it.I came to find out that St.
Augustine didn’t use “those words,” at least not all
of them.

. . . for already on this matter
two councils have sent to the Apostolic See, whence also rescripts (reports)
have come. The cause is finished.

What DID St. Augustine say?Two councils (from the African bishops) had
been sent to Rome (the Apostolic See) and Rome had replied by sending a reports
(rescripts – in other words, “had spoken”), and upon that the cause is
finished.

So, even though St. Augustine didn’t use all of
“those words” he did “say that!”Catholics who wish to use the paraphrase of “roma locuta est, causa
finita est” must then be aware that it
IS a paraphrase so as to not be caught off-guard by a challenger and allow
the challenge of “But Augustine didn’t use those words,” to derail and/or
sidetrack the point they were trying to make.[2]

Why DID St. Augustine Say That?

Well the controversy at the time was that of
Pelagianism.Pelagianism basically is a
condemned heresy that denies Original Sin and Christian Grace.Pelagius was a Catholic priest from Britain
(though there are discussions that he came from Scotland or Ireland).At some point Pelagius moved to Rome, and
according to St. Augustine, (De peccat. orig., xxiv) he lived in Rome "for a very
long time.”[3]Pelagius had denied Original Sin and was
teaching this.In 411 AD he left Rome
for Africa, where he first meets St. Augustine.The African bishops, of which St. Augustine has become the
spokesperson, convene a council in 416 and they, through Augustine, write to
Pope Innocent I.

Council of Carthage, June 416 AD, To Innocent I:

(Speaking about Celestius) 2. This act, lord brother, we thought right to
intimate to your holy charity, in order that to the statutes of our mediociry
might be added the authority of the apostolic see to protect the safety
of many, and to correct the perversity of some.

(Then speaking about Pelagius) 4. If,
therefore, Pelagius seems to your holiness to have been justly absolved by the
Episcopal acts which as said to have been transacted in the East, at all events
the error itself and the impiety, which now has many asserters in different
places, ought to be anathematized by the
authority of the apostolic see also…[4]

Council of Mileve, 416 A.D., To Innocent I:

Since God has by a special gift of his
grace set you in the apostolic see, and has given such a man to our
times, so that it could be rather imputed to us as a fault of negligence, if we
withheld from your reverence whatever is to be furnished for the Church, than
that you should be able to receive the same contempt or neglect, we beseech you
to apply your pastoral care to the great peril of the weak members of Christ…

The
authors of this most pernicious error are said to be Pelagius and Celestius,
whom, indeed, we should prefer to be cured in the Church, rather than that they
should be cut off from the Church, if no necessity compels…

We
consider that by the help of the mercy of our Lord God, who deigns both to
direct your counsel and to hear your prayers, those who hold such perverse and
pernicious opinions will more easily yield to the authority of your holiness, drawn from the authority of Holy
Scripture, so that we may be congratulated by their correction, than
saddened by their ruin…

We write this from the council of
Numidia, imitating our colleagues of the church and province of Carthage, who
we understand have written on this matter to
the apostolic see, which your blessedness adorns.[5]

We send to your holiness letters from
the two councils of the provinces of
Carthage and Numida (Mileve)…

We have heard that there are some in
the city of Rome, where he [Pelagius] lived long, who favored him for various
reasons, some clearly because he is said to have persuaded them, but more
because they do not believe him to hold such views, especially as it is boasted
that ecclesiastical acts were drawn up in the East, where he is living, by
which he is declared innocent.If
indeed the bishops pronounced him catholic, we must believe that it was for no other
reason than because he said he acknowledged the grace of God…

No doubt your blessedness will judge of
the accusations in the same way as the acts [of the two councils], and we
assume that your kindness of heart will pardon us for having sent to your holiness
a longer letter than you might have perhaps wished.For we do not pour back our
little stream for the purpose of replenishing your great fountain; but in these times of severe testing . . . we
wish this to be proved by your, whether our
littleness flows from the same head of waters as your abundance, and by
your reply to be consoled, because we share in common the one grace.[6]

Innocent I, to the Council of Carthage, January
27, 417

In inquiring about those things which
should be handled with all care by priests, and especially by a true, just and
catholic council, by preserving as you have done, the example of ancient
tradition, and by being mindful of the discipline of the Church, you have truly
strengthened the vigour of our religion, no less in consulting, than before in
passing sentence.For you decided that it was proper to refer to our judgment,
knowing what is due the apostolic see, since all we who are set in
this place desire to follow the very apostle from whom the very episcopate and
whole authority of this name emerged… and that you ask for a decision which may benefit all the churches of the world
together; so that the Church, being established in her rules, and confirmed
in this decree of just proclamation
against such errors, may be unable to tolerate those men.[7]

Noting
quickly here, the proclamation is against the errors primarily, and secondarily
to those that hold them.

Innocent I, to the Council of Mileve, January 27,
417

We declare that Pelagius and Celestius,
that is the inventors of new doctrines which, as the apostle said, are wont to
produce no edification, but rather utterly empty questionings, should be by the
authority of apostolic vigour be deprived of ecclesiastical communion
(excommunication), until they recover from the snares of the devil, by whom
they are held prisoners according to their own choice; and that meanwhile they
should not be received within the Lord’s fold, because, following the course of
a crooked way, they have themselves chosen to desert.[8]

So,
we have two councils in Africa that have convened and condemned primarily
Pelagianism and have also excommunicated Pelagius and Celestius.They write to the Bishop of Rome (the
apostolic see), Innocent I, seeking his adjudication on this matter – for his
judgment would “benefit all the churches of the world together.”And Pope St. Innocent I does indeed agree
with Carthage and Mileve and he condemns the heresy as well as excommunicating
the heretics.

In
March of 417 Innocent I dies and is succeeded by Pope Zosimus.Celestius writes a letter of confession to
the Bishop of Rome, which is received by Zosimus.Keep in mind that Pope Innocent I “left open” the door of
reconciliation to Pelagius and Celestius, “until they recover from the snares
of the devil…”Celestius attempts to
appease the new pope by sending that confession entitled Libellus.Zosimus writes to
Aurelius and the African bishops (Magnum pondus, September, 417 A.D.) stating
that Celestius came to “us for examination, asking to be acquitted of those
charges on which he had been wrongly accused to the apostolic see.”[9]Zosimus was not satisfied with just
Celestius’ written confession, and called him to Rome for further
interrogation.

Pelagius
had also written a confession entitled Libellus
Fidei, in 417.E. Giles (the source
for the above quotes and an Anglican with no motive to support the cause of the
papacy) admits that Pelagius’ confession is orthodox – but includes some
evasive passages on free will and baptism (baptism being one of the chief
precepts of Pelagianism).[10]From a commentary on the University of Notre
Dame web site:“Pope Zosimus, whom the
stratagems of Celestius had for a moment deluded…”[11]A known opponent to the Catholic Church and
public defender of Protestantism writes:“Zosimus (417-426)—He was deceived by Pelagius’ pretensions to
orthodoxy, and reversed Innocent’s policies regarding the Pelagians.”[12]So, what we see here is that Pope Zosimus
was deceived by Celestius and Pelagius in their confessions – both in writing
and in person.Based on those
confessions, Zosimus declared that Pelagius and Celestius had “unfettered
faith.”I must note, that Zosimus is
not declaring the error of Pelagianism
to be orthodox, only that the two priests – after presenting their case to the
apostolic see, as Pope Innocent I had allowed for – had been absolved.The African bishops knew Zosimus had been
deceived, and continued their protest.

Sermon 131 of St. Augustine, September 23, 417
A.D.:

10. …”For being ignorant of God’s
righteousness, and wishing to establish their own, they have not submitted to
the righteousness of God.”My brethren,
have compassion with me.When you find
such men, do not hide them; have no misdirected mercy.Refute those who contradict, and those who
resist bring to us.For already two councils on this question
have been sent to the apostolic see; and replies have also come from
there.The cause is finished; would
that the error might be sometime finished also![13]

So,
I reiterate, St. Augustine refers to the two African councils that were sent to
Pope Innocent, then Bishop of Rome, and that Rome had responded (had spoken)
and Pelagianism is condemned – the case IS closed.The problem though, is that even though Rome has ruled on
Pelagianism – there still were heretics about, and “would that their error
might sometime be finished also!”Though St. Augustine doesn’t use the words “roma locuta est” – clearly,
Rome had spoken, and he did use the
words, “causa finita est” (the case is closed – or cause is finished).

In
418, Pope Zosimus is convinced that he had been deceived, and he reverses his
statement regarding the orthodoxy of Pelagius and Celestius and renews the
excommunication of the heretics.The
deception of Zosimus was short-lived, but notorious.Some Protestants (those that are even somewhat aware of the
details of this incident – but ignorant in how the Church defines
infallibility) attempt to use this to counter Papal Infallibility.The question gets asked, “This was clearly a
matter of faith, how could an ‘infallible pope’ err in this matter?Granted, Pelagianism is a matter of faith –
but also for a decree to be considered infallible, it must be something that is
binding on the entire Church.[14]Since the excommunication of individuals
(Pelagius and Celestius, in this case) is only binding on those individuals –
it is not a matter of infallibility.[15]

[2] I wrote this
article due to several debates I have had with a well known Protestant
apologist on this subject (see: http://www.americancatholictruthsociety.com/jrw
), and was further motivated after watching video of a debate between him and a
well known and respected Catholic apologist.The debate was on Purgatory, and had nothing to do with the Pelagian
controversy.However the Catholic used
the phrase, “Roma locuta est, causa finita est” at one point, and the
Protestant challenged, “Did you know that Augustine never said those
words?”Well, the Catholic was quite
sure St. Augustine had indeed used those words – but the Protestant said, “I
have the Latin right here in front of me, he clearly did not!”From that point on, the Catholic seemed a
bit flustered and those watching would likely agree – it was a turning point,
as far as “debate points” go, in favor of the Protestant.Had the Catholic been prepared with the facts
presented in this article, he could have easily refuted the Protestant’s
implication and proceeded on in confidence.Technically, the Protestant is correct, St. Augustine didn’t use “those
words” – not all of them anyway – but this article clearly shows that even
though “those words” were not used, St. Augustine DID “say that.”Also, as the excerpts show, the African
councils were also attributing a special authority to “the” apostolic see –
that of St. Peter’s successor, the Bishop of Rome.